PDA

View Full Version : QBASIC/BASIC Compiler for OS X?




hotwire132002
Feb 23, 2005, 01:03 PM
I'm looking for a BASIC compiler for Mac OS X. I'm thinking maybe there's something that I could run in Terminal?

I don't need to do anything graphical, just basic BASIC, and I don't much feel like learning the differences in RealBASIC (or paying for an expensive compiler.)

The reason I want to use BASIC rather than C++ or something similar is that I am quite experienced with BASIC and would rather not learn a new language.

Any ideas? Thanks in advance!



bousozoku
Feb 23, 2005, 02:59 PM
There are a couple others, but you have to pay for them.

There isn't exactly a good reason for anyone to develop a BASIC product (read compiler/interpreter) anymore.

hotwire132002
Feb 23, 2005, 03:14 PM
There are a couple others, but you have to pay for them.

There isn't exactly a good reason for anyone to develop a BASIC product (read compiler/interpreter) anymore.

I can understand that, since the language is quite dated.

I ended up downloading a DOS emulator, and running QBasic on top of that. It works well.

Simon Liquid
Feb 23, 2005, 03:15 PM
Well, there're Chipmunk Basic (http://www.nicholson.com/rhn/basic/) and Metal Basic (http://www.iit.edu/~sarimar/GDS/metal.html) which are both free. I tried them a few years back and they've both seen several updates since so I'd rather not comment on their relative merits. In any case, I wasn't looking for a computer style programming language, just something I could program like my TI calculator.

If you just want a command line implementation, you might try one for Linux that can be or has been compiled on a Mac. One place to look would be sourceforge.net, home of many open source projects. A quick search shows one result here (http://sourceforge.net/projects/smallbasic/) that, while there's no ready built package for Mac, seems like it should be buildable on any UNIX.

Good luck.

sushi
Oct 9, 2005, 01:16 PM
There are a couple others, but you have to pay for them.

There isn't exactly a good reason for anyone to develop a BASIC product (read compiler/interpreter) anymore.
Why? I would suggest that all depends on what you are developing.

C++, VB and others create huge files and are rather involved.

For a small tight app, BASIC is fine. Also good for teaching top down design and linear programming.

Just like FORTH, Ada, COBOL, FORTRAN, etc.

Each language has it's place -- even good ole assembly.

Speaking of which, one of my favorite Word Processors is written in assembly. Considering that it does page layout type tasks, still works in Classic today, and was last updated in 1996, that isn't bad. It comes on 4 floppy disks of which 2 are the dictionary and thesaurus.

Of course, if you really want to hit the 1's and 0's, you can always do object oriented programming with assembly.

Sure there are high level development tools which make developing more easy by simplifying the process. I'm not against those at all. Just think that older proven languages have their place as well.

Sushi

chainprayer
Aug 20, 2011, 06:02 PM
im actually quite happy to find a BASIC compiler for mac. although it may not be something that is used much anymore, i know the language quite well and can use it to write some quick programs to perform quick calculations and scenarios for my personal work use.

robvas
Aug 21, 2011, 11:08 AM
im actually quite happy to find a BASIC compiler for mac. although it may not be something that is used much anymore, i know the language quite well and can use it to write some quick programs to perform quick calculations and scenarios for my personal work use.

Give Ruby a shot for what you used to do in BASIC. It's pretty neat.

http://tryruby.org/

You can also type 'irb' into a Terminal session on your Mac.